U.S. Issues SCOTUS to take on allowing Gays to marry. What say you? - Page 4

**BigRedChief** · 12-09-2012, 09:03 AM

There are two cases(DOMA and Proposition 8) to be heard by the SCOTUS this session.

At the base of the question is do gay Americans have the same rights as heterosexual Americans? And if so, do they need their constitutional rights protected at the federal level.

I've never had an openly gay friend, co-worker or family member. I did coach a little league baseball team. On that team I had a player with two Mom's. The players and the parents accepted the kid of the two Mom's as any other player. The other parents let their kids go over to the two Mom's house for sleepovers etc. It wasn't a factor to consider in the slightest.

I don't have any personal experience to know what rights is actually being denied. However, I believe that for whatever reason they were born that way. It's not a choice. You can't pray it out of them. You can't give them therapy and turn them into heterosexuals. They are what they are naturally and we should just accept them.

IMHO, the government/city/state/society have no right to tell it's citizens what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom. some of our citizens who they can and who they can't love. Who they can and can't marry. History will not be kind to the discrimination of gays, with cause. It's time to end this era of gay discrimination.

**patteeu** · 12-09-2012, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

The problem is that you need a compelling interest to overcome strict scrutiny.

No such compelling interest exists.

Why should strict scrutiny be the standard instead of rational basis?

FD · 12-09-2012, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FD

I agree the argument I presented wouldn't withstand strict scrutiny, but the court has been wary about applying that standard to issues other than race, and as far as I know do not apply it to issues of sexual orientation.

I will also add, I think prop 8 should be overturned under rational basis, but that is a fairly narrow issue.

**BigRedChief** · 12-09-2012, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave

Why is that funny?

you seem to be an intelligent poster. You really think that you don't have to care about an issue unless it directly effects you?

HonestChieffan · 12-09-2012, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

you seem to be an intelligent poster. You really think that you don't have to care about an issue unless it directly effects you?

No one can compel another to care about an issue. People everyday choose where to expend their emotional energy. Are there any issues you don't care about?

Dave · 12-09-2012, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

you seem to be an intelligent poster. You really think that you don't have to care about an issue unless it directly effects you?

Not this one.

It has no effect on the economy, national debt, or job creation.

Pointless.

**mlyonsd** · 12-09-2012, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave

Not this one.

It has no effect on the economy, national debt, or job creation.

Pointless.

I'm with you. If it were put up to a vote in my state I wouldn't participate because it doesn't matter to me.

**BigRedChief** · 12-09-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave

Not this one.

It has no effect on the economy, national debt, or job creation.

Pointless.

wrong. Spouses get benefits. You think benefits are free? The money for those benefits just appears out of thin air?

cosmo20002 · 12-09-2012, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcan

Where are all the pro slavery people today?

If you read enough threads in DC, you'll be able to spot them pretty quickly.

HonestChieffan · 12-09-2012, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

wrong. Spouses get benefits. You think benefits are free? The money for those benefits just appears out of thin air?

That is true. So everyone else will end up footing the bill because of this

**BigRedChief** · 12-09-2012, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

That is true. So everyone else will end up footing the bill because of this

No more than gays were footing the bill for heterosexuals.

HonestChieffan · 12-09-2012, 11:12 AM

as long as someone gets stuck with the bill, its all good.

Bump · 12-09-2012, 11:12 AM

Why is this still up for discussion? If they want to marry, let them. Religion is fake bullshit and if you strongly oppose them marrying each other, then shame on you.

Brock · 12-09-2012, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

as long as someone gets stuck with the bill, its all good.

You mean like single people have been paying for married couples and their spawn?

Dave · 12-09-2012, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

wrong. Spouses get benefits. You think benefits are free? The money for those benefits just appears out of thin air?

Benefits?

Alimony?

HonestChieffan · 12-09-2012, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

You mean like single people have been paying for married couples and their spawn?

and like single peoples parents have paid for the little bastards since birth. Yes

View Poll Results: Should we allow gays the same rights as hetrosexuals?
Yes	68	72.34%
No	8	8.51%
Leave it to the states. Not a federal issue.	17	18.09%
GAZ says FU BRC, you are gay	1	1.06%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

12-09-2012, 09:03 AM
BigRedChief Brainwashed Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Swims with fishes Casino cash: $2265082	SCOTUS to take on allowing Gays to marry. What say you? There are two cases(DOMA and Proposition 8) to be heard by the SCOTUS this session. At the base of the question is do gay Americans have the same rights as heterosexual Americans? And if so, do they need their constitutional rights protected at the federal level. I've never had an openly gay friend, co-worker or family member. I did coach a little league baseball team. On that team I had a player with two Mom's. The players and the parents accepted the kid of the two Mom's as any other player. The other parents let their kids go over to the two Mom's house for sleepovers etc. It wasn't a factor to consider in the slightest. I don't have any personal experience to know what rights is actually being denied. However, I believe that for whatever reason they were born that way. It's not a choice. You can't pray it out of them. You can't give them therapy and turn them into heterosexuals. They are what they are naturally and we should just accept them. IMHO, the government/city/state/society have no right to tell it's citizens what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom. some of our citizens who they can and who they can't love. Who they can and can't marry. History will not be kind to the discrimination of gays, with cause. It's time to end this era of gay discrimination.
Posts: 37,925

12-09-2012, 11:12 AM	#56
HonestChieffan Hoffa called me an SOB Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the Country in MO Casino cash: $1220504	as long as someone gets stuck with the bill, its all good. __________________ "The best time to sell peanuts is when the circus is in town."
Posts: 21,906

12-09-2012, 11:12 AM	#57
Bump Legalize It Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Boston sucks :( Casino cash: $53108	Why is this still up for discussion? If they want to marry, let them. Religion is fake bullshit and if you strongly oppose them marrying each other, then shame on you. __________________ Marijuana is only illegal because it helps
Posts: 11,138

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode